Switch Theme:

Are we about to see another drop off?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
VF-1S Valkyrie Squadron Commander





Mississippi

I think a large portion of the board game/tabletop growth we had seen in the last 10 years or so had been driven in part by the economic slump; people want entertainment and board game & RPGs are relatively cheap - especially if you factor in buying one copy for 4 or so players (vs., say four separate copies of a video game, plus any console or game service fees)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
With the economy seeming to be in recovery, I suspect people are returning to post-slump actives or plain willing to spend more on their fun.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/01 19:44:47


It never ends well 
   
Made in us
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control






Across the Rubicon

 Stormonu wrote:
I think a large portion of the board game/tabletop growth we had seen in the last 10 years or so had been driven in part by the economic slump; people want entertainment and board game & RPGs are relatively cheap - especially if you factor in buying one copy for 4 or so players (vs., say four separate copies of a video game, plus any console or game service fees)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
With the economy seeming to be in recovery, I suspect people are returning to post-slump actives or plain willing to spend more on their fun.


That might be part of it, but I think a larger portion of the upswing in these games is a combination of doing an activity that is unplugged/in person social, has some nostalgia of board gaming when younger and the fact that there are indeed some rather clever games out there. Additionally, I think with the internet it is much easier to see what modern tabletop/board/card games are all about instead of just randomly coming across someone that just likes these games pre-Youtube. I also don't think it hurts matters that things considered nerd/geek aren't nearly as looked down upon as they used to be.

I never really played board games beyond the common and popular roll to move types that you can probably easily guess of the 80s. I started playing D&D in junior high and then again in college. While I would like to get involved with an rpg, I don't really want to commit that much time or effort especially for a D&D-esque fantasy rpg. I just randomly came across a board game video on Youtube which completely changed my understanding of what board games were today. Despite playing rpgs for a far number of years, I never really gave board games a consideration that they too had evolved well beyond Monopoly. For me, I went from board games to board games with miniatures (Mansions of Madness mostly) then moved to miniatures wargames as a way to try and re-capture some of my favorite parts of tabletop rpgs without the long term investment. Even now, I largely play miniatures games as an excuse to get out of the house and meet more people in social environment (as opposed to a work environment) as I am getting a bit too old for the bar scene. While I am not spending as much money even in the Games Workshop HHHobby compared to my bar tabs, that really isn't a consideration to why I enjoy it.

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has. That, and the usual cultural swings that just sort of happen in the same way that Westerns used to be super popular but aren't anymore.

   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran






GW is inflating their own bubble. It will eventually burst.

While I wouldn't anticipate GW going under, their release schedule is so rapid and unsustainable that they will eventually run out of steam. This will place an immense amount of pressure on the studio to come up with something / anything just to push product out the door. These 'things' will be poorly thought out money grabs that will damage their core products.

Look what's happening with their most iconic property, the Space Marines. The entire line of Space Marines is slowly being obsoleted because GW has no idea where to go or what to do with them to perpetuate Space Marines sales. So they come up with short sighted, hack ideas like the Primaris Marines that paint them into a corner. So poorly thought out that their most iconic property that has kept them in business for decades is now slowing being ruined and eroding away.

This practice, if continued, along with the ever decreasing life span of product will eventually lead to a loss in player base and lost sales.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/05 15:03:07


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has. That, and the usual cultural swings that just sort of happen in the same way that Westerns used to be super popular but aren't anymore.
I think going full social justice will do significant damage to the industry. I mean, it has taken down Star Wars and it has been ruining Marvel comics for years (with the MCU not far behind). When it can effectively destroy the most popular IPs in the world with decades and decades of good will, what can't it destroy?

When escapism becomes preachy, it stops being escapism. And all the growth and new opportunities the miniature and board game market currently have, all it will take is for one company to pretend that their toy soldiers are Important and the conversation stops being about how cool this new model is and becomes how Important this new model is. The values by which we judge the entire industry and its products will shift. Things that are cool, but not Important will be treated with suspicion, and companies will get by making things that are Important but not cool (or even good), and sooner or later, the Important thing stops generating money because there's something over there which is even more Important, and there's nothing cool (or good) left to care about. Heaven help us if Disney ever buys into this market (probably by buying Asmodee).

Calling it a "cultural swing" feels a bit like an understatement, though... That makes it sound like a fad. But a fad is something where interest burns brightly and burns out quickly (pogs!), while this is more of a reflection of how small and insignificant we feel in society. As long as society makes us feel bad, our need to glom onto Important things will always be there.
   
Made in ca
Grumpy Longbeard





Canada

oni wrote:While I wouldn't anticipate GW going under, their release schedule is so rapid and unsustainable that they will eventually run out of steam. This will place an immense amount of pressure on the studio to come up with something / anything just to push product out the door. These 'things' will be poorly thought out money grabs that will damage their core products.

I feel like this describes GW releases already.


Resurrectionists
Nightstalkers
Dwarfs  
   
Made in ca
God-like Imperator Titan Commander




Halifax

I don't think it's damaging the core products so much as loading up the vertical market at the expense of expanding the market. There's so much for people that are all-in, and a couple of extra things for people who might be interested. There's that repackaging of 4th edition's Space Marines and Orks, but there's very little light/inexpensive intro-gaming.

Mind you, contra Sqorgar, appealing to women and minorities instead of the usual white beardos does a fantastic job expanding the market for GW market. Just like with movies and comics it'll not only expand the audience, but maybe also give us something to enjoy beyond what's demanded by the pasty grognard in cargo shorts.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Nurglitch wrote:
Mind you, contra Sqorgar, appealing to women and minorities instead of the usual white beardos does a fantastic job expanding the market for GW market. Just like with movies and comics it'll not only expand the audience, but maybe also give us something to enjoy beyond what's demanded by the pasty grognard in cargo shorts.
You'll have to point out examples of what products you think have an expanded audience due to social justice, because all the ones I can think of - literally the biggest IPs and industries out there - have been irreparably damaged by it. And maybe calling people "white beardos" is the kind of self important bullgak that starts it.

Broadening your audience is not a terrible idea, but there's a wrong way to do it. I think people, in general, respond better to products that don't feel like they were designed by a marketing team and pounded into mediocrity by focus testing. Appealing to a larger audience in a cynical, manipulative way is not going to make anybody happy. You are just going to lose your loyal audience and you won't make up for it by getting a new, better audience. That audience will be anything buy loyal. They will be fickle as hell. How does the saying go? "If she'll cheat with you, she'll cheat on you"?

The most important thing - the absolute most important thing - is that you don't try to pass off broadening your audience as a morality play. You aren't doing Important things. Marketing to women and minorities is just marketing. You aren't applying for sainthood. And people who don't like your marketing aren't racists or misogynists. It's just marketing. It used to be that the first rule of marketing was "never send away a potential paying customer". Doing the exact opposite of that is just being bad at your job.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/06 23:41:05


 
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Broodlord




Lake County, Illinois

Unfortunately it seems like, at least in the short term, there's only an upside in appealing to the self-important social justice crowd. If you're making a movie, for example, if it ticks the right boxes with that audience, they will go see it, and even love it, even if it isn't all that good of a movie. So you can sell more tickets without having to make a really great movie, so you've almost got some guaranteed sales, reducing your risk. That can take a movie like Black Panther, which was a decent but kind of average Marvel movie, and make it seem like a great movie. Because people who just care about the actual movie liked it well enough, but people who care about what they think it means for society or whatever thinks it's the greatest thing ever.

On the other hand, it may not be a good long term strategy. If you go to far with it you alienate your core audience, and if you rely on it too heavily for your ticket sales then you focus more on the message than making a good movie. Then as soon as you make a misstep and do something that meets with disapproval from the "social justice" crowd, then they'll abandon you. And if you've lost your core fans already, then you don't have anybody left.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Unfortunately it seems like, at least in the short term, there's only an upside in appealing to the self-important social justice crowd. If you're making a movie, for example, if it ticks the right boxes with that audience, they will go see it, and even love it, even if it isn't all that good of a movie. So you can sell more tickets without having to make a really great movie, so you've almost got some guaranteed sales, reducing your risk. That can take a movie like Black Panther, which was a decent but kind of average Marvel movie, and make it seem like a great movie. Because people who just care about the actual movie liked it well enough, but people who care about what they think it means for society or whatever thinks it's the greatest thing ever.
That can work for a single movie, but you can't sustain it for very long. You need to create a loyal customer, and just getting them in the seats won't do much if their reward is posting their ticket stub on Twitter rather than seeing, you know, a good movie. To be honest, I'm really curious what the numbers for Captain Marvel 2 will be.

On the other hand, it may not be a good long term strategy. If you go to far with it you alienate your core audience, and if you rely on it too heavily for your ticket sales then you focus more on the message than making a good movie. Then as soon as you make a misstep and do something that meets with disapproval from the "social justice" crowd, then they'll abandon you. And if you've lost your core fans already, then you don't have anybody left.
They were never your audience to begin with. They were the audience of your social justice, not your marketing, and you can't keep giving them that self important high. Seeing Captain Marvel - that amazing first step for women super heroes in the MCU - the first time is a high. Seeing the second one won't do gak.

But I don't care about that. I'm fine with companies that ruin their own products. It's frustrating, but it is ultimately their product and if they want to make terrible products then I can simply go find something else to pay attention to. Or make something myself. I'm not a slave to Marvel. The thing I have a problem with is this marketing that convinces people to call each other racist or sexist for disagreeing with it - with the MARKETING! How is it possible that I'm not allowed to simply think that GW's new Repentia designs are awful without someone suggesting that I secretly hate women? How is that now an unavoidable part of discussing any Sisters of Battle model?

Like, I think Black Panther is a terrible movie that only entertains you as long as you don't think real hard about it, but I've literally had comments like that removed from forums as "bigoted content". They threatened to ban me! I criticized the writing! And because the marketing convinced a bunch of idiots that Black Panther is somehow important (he's been in the comics for 60 years, and he wasn't important then either), I'm somehow a hateful bigot because I think a popcorn summer blockbuster sucks. That's not okay. Marvel encourages this behavior and I'm off Marvel now. They've lost a lifelong customer because of this crap, so I hope the people they replaced ex-customers like me with are buying as many comics as I did... *goes and checks sales number* Oh....
   
Made in gb
Soul Token




West Yorkshire, England

Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has.


It's possible it might shift that way, but I think it's more likely that there is something that can't be replaced about sitting down with your friends around a table and looking away from a screen. IME, "the next generation" don't have any inherent bias against non-digital activities if you just make the effort to reach out and get them involved, rather than just going "kids these days, right?".

"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich." 
   
Made in gb
Council of 13 Runner Up






Yup.

The appeal of wargames remains unchanged. Building things is satisfying. Winning is satisfying. Competing is challenging. Painting is satisfying.

There's basically a level of investment in terms of time and effort in this hobby that computers simply cannot replicate. And that's a near universal appeal.

I mean for me, my hobby is currently pretty much building the models. Because it's immensely satisfying. I get a real kick out of taking a bunch of plastic parts, and assembling them into a solid model. And GW in particular have done their best to remove frustration from that equation (consider their old metal and plastic kits, compared to the modern ones), making it even more enjoyable, as I don't spend time wiggling bits to fit, getting glue everywhere as a result, or having to fill gaps. (though those very things are of appeal to others, I'm only speaking for myself).

Much as I enjoy a tear up on GTA, or playing Punch Poverty on Batman? They just don't compare for me.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives?Why not join us?

 
   
Made in us
Focused Fire Warrior




United States

 Elemental wrote:
Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has.


It's possible it might shift that way, but I think it's more likely that there is something that can't be replaced about sitting down with your friends around a table and looking away from a screen. IME, "the next generation" don't have any inherent bias against non-digital activities if you just make the effort to reach out and get them involved, rather than just going "kids these days, right?".


As a millennial who only recently got into the hobby. It wasn't me being "more interested in video games" that made me wait until adulthood to start wargaming. It was "lack of enough money to purchase an army". Buying one $60 game every couple months was much more palatable as a teenager with than saving up for months to try and drop $500 dollars on an army for a tabletop wargame that I had no guarantee I could find people to pay with. (none of my friends played. So if I got into it, I was getting into it solo.) My parents were also way more willing to buy a video game than hobby supplies and models because they saw the money sink it would be lol.
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block





I'm interested to see what people have to say about Asmodee/FFG now that the new Marvel Crisis Protocol IP has just launched.

For those unaware, there's a new skirmish miniatures game in ~40mm scale, that pits heroes and villains of Marvel against each other.

The reason I bring it up is because it's a combination of TWO things that many people claim are in a bubble about to pop:

Superheroes/MCU, and miniature collecting/gaming.

So far, the reception for the game has been phenomenal, but if this isn't the peak epitomization of a bubble bursting IP, I don't know what else is.
   
Made in gb
Council of 13 Runner Up






To be fair, peeps have been saying the MCU bubble is about to pop since, well, Iron Man back in 2008

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives?Why not join us?

 
   
Made in us
Excellent Exalted Champion of Chaos





 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
To be fair, peeps have been saying the MCU bubble is about to pop since, well, Iron Man back in 2008


I think its more people want to see the bubble pop, much like they wanted to see GW fail for 20 years.

GW points don't bring balance. They exist purely for structure. You can get more balance from no points than you do from GW points. You however can get no structure in your game without points. 
   
Made in ca
God-like Imperator Titan Commander




Halifax

I have been assured that GW died a long time ago and that Warhammer is a dead game...

I think it's like how certain people feel like including women and minorities is ruining everything, rather than enriching everyone. Some people aren't happy unless someone else is doing worse.

And it's kind of funny to see the pretzels they'll twist themselves into justify themselves in the face of reality. It's how we get bubbles in the first place.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Elemental wrote:Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.
I know you are just trying to insinuate that I'm a racist here, but I am against representation. I'm not against broadening the audience of something, but representation is an extremely unhealthy way to do it. It's like people identified a real problem, then came up with the worst possible solution to fix it.

Human beings have an amazing ability for empathy and are (successfully) asked to relate to talking cars, animals, aliens, the undead, robots, and even littler (American Beauty). My favorite tv show, which I've seen hundreds of episodes of, is a Korean variety show - I don't speak Korea and before watching this show, had very little knowledge or understanding of Korean culture. It was about as alien as something can get, and according to the beliefs behind "representation", I can't appreciate something that is alien to me.

The idea that you can only market something to a person through overt tokenism is, frankly, bizarre. It's cynical and betrays a fundamental lack of empathy and trust in your fellow man. There's an innate premise there that if they can't identify with people who look like you, then you can't identify with people who look like them. This means that attempts at representation are more about manipulating these people, not actually representing them. The other alternative is that you identify with them just fine, but don't believe they are capable of reciprocating. You have such a low opinion of their intelligence that you assume these dumb animals can only respond to shallow, surface level pandering. I'm not sure which is worse.

The way you broaden an audience is not through representation, but through a diversity of offering. If you only make superhero movies, then try making a horror movie or a romantic comedy too. If you just make a superhero movie, but this time the character is black, that will work once and your audience will not grow as a result.

ajax_xaja wrote:I'm interested to see what people have to say about Asmodee/FFG now that the new Marvel Crisis Protocol IP has just launched.

For those unaware, there's a new skirmish miniatures game in ~40mm scale, that pits heroes and villains of Marvel against each other.

The reason I bring it up is because it's a combination of TWO things that many people claim are in a bubble about to pop:

Superheroes/MCU, and miniature collecting/gaming.

So far, the reception for the game has been phenomenal, but if this isn't the peak epitomization of a bubble bursting IP, I don't know what else is.

There's two things at work here, with a more iffy third:

1) Marvel has an 80 year history filled with a lot of interesting characters and stories, and a lot of nerds (like myself) grew up reading Marvel comics and have a fondness for it. However, the vast majority of customers out there only know a handful of Marvel characters (not coincidentally, the ones in the movies) - there's already people who are going, "Who is Baron Zemo?". As the game progresses, it will naturally move further away from the popular, known Marvel properties and move into the more esoteric stuff, which will have a much smaller audience of people who will follow it.

Knight Models' DC Universe game has this problem, but it is mostly alleviated by the fact that the game is mostly played by the people who know the esoteric comic canon. I mean, most people don't know who the Court of Owls are - I think they've only been in the comic books. They aren't in any of the cartoons or movies (that I'm aware of). That's fine because Knight Models doesn't need to sell 40,000 models to make a profit. The DC property is not that expensive and resin models are cheaper to cast and easier to design. When they are targeting a broad audience, like with their two player starter set, they base it around The Dark Knight movie.

Asmodee has a different problem. Because of the MCU, the Marvel license is considerably more expensive. And they are using hard plastic models which require a huge investment of money upfront, with their models being made in China and shipped to the US. This not only makes their models more expensive to make, but they have to sell a lot more of them in order to see a return on their investment. They can shove someone like Baron Zemo into the starter set, but they won't be able to sell him by himself for $20. People might pay $40 for the Hulk (or even the Hulk-buster Iron Man suit), but will they pay $40 for The Abomination or Amadeus Cho Hulk? I know people that would pay $20 for a Taskmaster figure, but would a large enough part of the game's audience do it? Marvel sells unique characters, and people might buy a few hundred stormtroopers, but they won't buy even two Hulks.

Basically, I think there is an upper limit to how far a Marvel miniatures game can go and still be financially viable. As long as the MCU and comics remain viable, they can keep the hype up, and focus on different characters and give them a boost in popularity.

2) The MCU and Marvel comics will probably not remain viable for long. Marvel comics has sucked for years now and they've been circling the drain for some time. They overship their comics in an effort to seem like they are doing gangbusters, but even when they basically give the comics away for free, they sit on shelves unbought. At this point, the actual number of comic book stores has been exponentially shrinking by about 5%-10% each year, and at some point, it will reach a point where they can't sell enough individual comic books even if they made a successful one. It seems increasingly likely that Disney will kill the line in favor of the MCU.

Problem is, the MCU has over two dozen movies in it and people are kind of getting tired of it. Endgame created a perfect jump off point for casual fans where the characters and storylines they enjoyed all had closure. Phase 4 includes a lot of unrecognizable characters, takes storylines from unpopular runs in the comics, and saturates the market with a bunch of MCU movies and tv series that nobody asked for or is eager to see. That's not to say that these won't be good movies, but the MCU is getting to Assassin's Creed levels of oversaturation, and they just announced about 15 projects intended for an audience which has largely already said their goodbyes.

If Marvel Comics dies and the MCU enjoys a much more moderate success, what does this mean for the miniatures game? Well, it means that the critical mass of a casual audience will dry up, and they'll have to start targeting those esoteric Marvel characters to keep interest up in the game - hello $20 Taskmaster! - but will that be enough to keep Asmodee and its investors happy? Are they okay with a moderate success in a niche market?

3) I expect Disney to buy Asmodee one day. Asmodee is the largest and most successful board game publisher. They have a big part of a major growing market that Disney doesn't currently target, and Asmodee is for sale. Right now, Disney is happy to license stuff out, but it is possible that they decide that, like their new streaming service, it makes more sense to just buy into the market directly. If they do, I think they are more likely to buy Asmodee than compete with them - they can threaten to take their Star Wars and Marvel license away, causing investors to get scared, then buy up Asmodee for pennies on the dollar.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nurglitch wrote:

I think it's like how certain people feel like including women and minorities is ruining everything, rather than enriching everyone. Some people aren't happy unless someone else is doing worse.

Tell me again how calling people "white beardos" is enriching them?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/07 13:14:48


 
   
Made in ca
Three Color Minimum






'Asmodee is the largest and most successful board game publisher.'

I think you forgot about Hasbro dude. Perhaps they are the largest hobby game publisher but not the biggest fish in the pond.

Also, Asmodee was sold to another investment firm several months ago. While Asmodee might be a big publisher, they are far from the biggest.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/08/07 13:23:17


 
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Broodlord




Lake County, Illinois

I agree with all that as being issues with the potential long term success of the game. Already they are planning to release characters they know wouldn't actually sell on their own, so they have to bundle them with another more popular character. Fans of the comics are going to want all kinds of characters that just won't sell enough to the casual audience to make a return on the investment of creating the hard plastic miniatures.
   
Made in ca
God-like Imperator Titan Commander




Halifax

 Sqorgar wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:

I think it's like how certain people feel like including women and minorities is ruining everything, rather than enriching everyone. Some people aren't happy unless someone else is doing worse.

Tell me again how calling people "white beardos" is enriching them?

Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/07 13:42:18


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Nurglitch wrote:
Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.
Don't be a jerk.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ghool wrote:
'Asmodee is the largest and most successful board game publisher.'

I think you forgot about Hasbro dude. Perhaps they are the largest hobby game publisher but not the biggest fish in the pond.
I didn't forget about Hasbro. I feel like, if Disney wanted to compete with Hasbro at that level, they would've done it decades ago. Instead, they'll compete with Wizards of the Coast, which Hasbro owns, since the more targeted hobby market is both starting to make some serious money and it will be easier for Disney to dominate in.

I do think that Disney won't compete against Wizards of the Coast unless they are willing to take on Hasbro, and it might be the main thing keeping them back. Big corporations like to divide the marketplace between them rather than step on each other's toes. But as long as they don't compete against Magic or DnD, Disney could prevent starting a turf war.

Also, Asmodee was sold to another investment firm several months ago. While Asmodee might be a big publisher, they are far from the biggest.

An investment firm will only keep Asmodee as long as it is making money. If Disney threatens to take away the Marvel and Star Wars license, Asmodee will be back on the market, cheap.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/07 14:18:22


 
   
Made in ca
God-like Imperator Titan Commander




Halifax

 Sqorgar wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:
Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.
Don't be a jerk.

It often helps to understand how others see you because then you can develop a sense of empathy for the Other, rather than throwing a tantrum about how all the women and darkies are ruining everything.
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Broodlord




Lake County, Illinois

Honestly people aren't worth responding to when they're obviously just trolling by insulting people to try to get a reaction, rather than trying to contribute anything intelligent. Probably best to just ignore such people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sqorgar wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Unfortunately it seems like, at least in the short term, there's only an upside in appealing to the self-important social justice crowd. If you're making a movie, for example, if it ticks the right boxes with that audience, they will go see it, and even love it, even if it isn't all that good of a movie. So you can sell more tickets without having to make a really great movie, so you've almost got some guaranteed sales, reducing your risk. That can take a movie like Black Panther, which was a decent but kind of average Marvel movie, and make it seem like a great movie. Because people who just care about the actual movie liked it well enough, but people who care about what they think it means for society or whatever thinks it's the greatest thing ever.
That can work for a single movie, but you can't sustain it for very long. You need to create a loyal customer, and just getting them in the seats won't do much if their reward is posting their ticket stub on Twitter rather than seeing, you know, a good movie. To be honest, I'm really curious what the numbers for Captain Marvel 2 will be.

On the other hand, it may not be a good long term strategy. If you go to far with it you alienate your core audience, and if you rely on it too heavily for your ticket sales then you focus more on the message than making a good movie. Then as soon as you make a misstep and do something that meets with disapproval from the "social justice" crowd, then they'll abandon you. And if you've lost your core fans already, then you don't have anybody left.
They were never your audience to begin with. They were the audience of your social justice, not your marketing, and you can't keep giving them that self important high. Seeing Captain Marvel - that amazing first step for women super heroes in the MCU - the first time is a high. Seeing the second one won't do gak.

But I don't care about that. I'm fine with companies that ruin their own products. It's frustrating, but it is ultimately their product and if they want to make terrible products then I can simply go find something else to pay attention to. Or make something myself. I'm not a slave to Marvel. The thing I have a problem with is this marketing that convinces people to call each other racist or sexist for disagreeing with it - with the MARKETING! How is it possible that I'm not allowed to simply think that GW's new Repentia designs are awful without someone suggesting that I secretly hate women? How is that now an unavoidable part of discussing any Sisters of Battle model?

Like, I think Black Panther is a terrible movie that only entertains you as long as you don't think real hard about it, but I've literally had comments like that removed from forums as "bigoted content". They threatened to ban me! I criticized the writing! And because the marketing convinced a bunch of idiots that Black Panther is somehow important (he's been in the comics for 60 years, and he wasn't important then either), I'm somehow a hateful bigot because I think a popcorn summer blockbuster sucks. That's not okay. Marvel encourages this behavior and I'm off Marvel now. They've lost a lifelong customer because of this crap, so I hope the people they replaced ex-customers like me with are buying as many comics as I did... *goes and checks sales number* Oh....


just getting them in the seats won't do much if their reward is posting their ticket stub on Twitter rather than seeing, you know, a good movie

The part I bolded there I don't quite agree with. Because people who like the "message" or whatever of a movie can easily delude themselves into thinking it's good even if it isn't. So making the movie good doesn't matter. There are people who think Black Panther was Oscar worthy. But, like you say, that probably only works for the first movie. The second one would have to actually be good so that the non "social justice" people will go see it, or top the previous on in terms of the social justice message, so that those people will get what they want out of it. However, I still think there is no particular downside to throwing that crowd a little bone. It's only adding to your audience, because the people who just want to see a good movie will still see your movie if it's good. So if you make an okay movie like Black Panther, but then convince people that it's a very important movie because "diversity" or something, you can sell way more tickets than the movie would have sold on it's own merits.

But anyway, I should probably move away from the movie analogy as it will just go further off topic. But I haven't seen that kind of things in any miniature games. I get what you mean about being called names by the kind of "social justice" people for not liking things you're supposed to like, but hopefully that's mostly a thing with internet trolls. I haven't ever had that experience in person.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/08/07 15:13:47


 
   
Made in ie
Elite Tyranid Warrior




Roscommon, Ireland

 Sqorgar wrote:
Elemental wrote:Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.
I know you are just trying to insinuate that I'm a racist here, but I am against representation.


If I had a penny everytime I heard a racist say... 'I'm not racist, but... (Insert racist comment here)', I'd be quite rich. Being against representation is a bit of a dog whistle.

I'll just report you, block you, and hope this thread can get back to the topic subject.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/07 16:13:01


The objective of the game is to win. The point of the game is to have fun. The two should never be confused. 
   
Made in ca
God-like Imperator Titan Commander




Halifax

More importantly, games need to appeal to more than just white beardos. I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.

Part of it is the price, and part of it is that accessibility as they're a café which means that you can have snacks and drinks while you play your boardgames, some of which play considerably faster than miniature games. Women in particular seem to be a majority of the clientele, and I'd imagine it's because they're not quite as marginalised in board games as they are in miniature gaming.

Which isn't to say there isn't a huge, long way to go because of the kind of 'white fragility' and 'male fragility' that sees expanding the appeal of a product as a betrayal of its core audience. But that we might see something of a Gouldian 'punctuated equilibrium' occur at the next economic downturn as companies trying to milk the same old moobs go belly-up, and companies with broader, more inclusive markets see less of a decline in income.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Nurglitch wrote:It often helps to understand how others see you because then you can develop a sense of empathy for the Other, rather than throwing a tantrum about how all the women and darkies are ruining everything.
I'm not going to take lessons on empathy from someone who calls other people "white beardos". Until you start treating the people who are already here with respect, I don't, for one second, buy your vacuous claims of empathy and virtue. You want to stop "othering"? Charity starts at home.

stonehorse wrote:If I had a penny everytime I heard a racist say... 'I'm not racist, but... (Insert racist comment here)', I'd be quite rich. Being against representation is a bit of a dog whistle.

I'll just report you, block you, and hope this thread can get back to the topic subject.
You're going to report me for having the wrong opinion on representation?

Nurglitch wrote:I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.
They make their money on snacks and drink. Your local GW makes money by selling games. GW wants customers that buy games, not cocktails.

When it comes down to it, the audience for GW's games is never going to be diverse. Not for stupid reasons like race or gender, but because of the time and money involved. It is strictly an upper-middle class hobby that requires an inordinate amount of time and money - that's why every GW player's story is "played as a teen, lost interested when I discovered girls or went to college, picked it up again as an adult". GW games tend to be teenagers and middle aged folks (if they have kids, their kids are older because toddlers and GW don't mix).

Do you honestly think that GW games are going to appeal to middle aged women? You think there's a lot of 40 year old women out there with a ton of disposable income, a lot of free time, and limited child care duties that really just want to spend four hours on a Saturday afternoon chucking a bunch of dice to see if a gang of Tyranids eviscerate some space marines? It's not going to happen, mate.
   
Made in us
Tormentor






St. Louis


Do you honestly think that GW games are going to appeal to middle aged women? You think there's a lot of 40 year old women out there with a ton of disposable income, a lot of free time, and limited child care duties that really just want to spend four hours on a Saturday afternoon chucking a bunch of dice to see if a gang of Tyranids eviscerate some space marines? It's not going to happen, mate.

At least a third of my gaming community is women. The fact that you view women enjoying our hobby as impossible says far more about you than women.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Nurglitch wrote:
More importantly, games need to appeal to more than just white beardos. I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.

Part of it is the price, and part of it is that accessibility as they're a café which means that you can have snacks and drinks while you play your boardgames, some of which play considerably faster than miniature games. Women in particular seem to be a majority of the clientele, and I'd imagine it's because they're not quite as marginalised in board games as they are in miniature gaming.

Which isn't to say there isn't a huge, long way to go because of the kind of 'white fragility' and 'male fragility' that sees expanding the appeal of a product as a betrayal of its core audience. But that we might see something of a Gouldian 'punctuated equilibrium' occur at the next economic downturn as companies trying to milk the same old moobs go belly-up, and companies with broader, more inclusive markets see less of a decline in income.


I'd be curious to know what the general demographic is in the Warhammer Citadel, considering that's a cafe. See if it really does make any considerable difference.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Laughing Man wrote:

At least a third of my gaming community is women. The fact that you view women enjoying our hobby as impossible says far more about you than women.
Out of curiosity, how big is your gaming community? Is it three people? How many women are there? How old are they? Do they have kids? How often do they play? How involved are they when they play? Are they there with significant others or by their own accord? Your anecdote here has several possible ways it could go, but you haven't provided any details.

Regardless, the plural of "anecdote" is not "proof". Warhammer is an expensive and time consuming hobby that is generally not going to be compatible with certain lifestyles. Even if everyone in the world was Warhammer's core audience, only a fraction of a fraction of those people would bother to engage in it for any extended period of time. I find the premise that there's a bunch of middle aged women out there who would totally play Warhammer 40k if not for the Sisters of Battle being too sexy to be comical.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Sqorgar wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:

At least a third of my gaming community is women. The fact that you view women enjoying our hobby as impossible says far more about you than women.
Out of curiosity, how big is your gaming community? Is it three people? How many women are there? How old are they? Do they have kids? How often do they play? How involved are they when they play? Are they there with significant others or by their own accord? Your anecdote here has several possible ways it could go, but you haven't provided any details.

Regardless, the plural of "anecdote" is not "proof". Warhammer is an expensive and time consuming hobby that is generally not going to be compatible with certain lifestyles. Even if everyone in the world was Warhammer's core audience, only a fraction of a fraction of those people would bother to engage in it for any extended period of time. I find the premise that there's a bunch of middle aged women out there who would totally play Warhammer 40k if not for the Sisters of Battle being too sexy to be comical.


You only find it comical because it's not your experience. My gaming group of 30 (give or take) is about a 1/4 women. And that's mini games (not just GW) board games and a few card games. And the ages range from a couple of teens to late thirties i'd say.
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: